[MOIMS-NAV-EXEC] XML History Question

Tue Nov 8 04:10:51 UTC 2016

Fran - 

In case I didn't say it before, your comments are much appreciated and should be duly considered by all.  As you say, there are additional considerations, so we'll have to see what our consensus is.

Thanks much,

Dan

Daniel L. Oltrogge
SDC Program Manager & Senior Research Astrodynamicist
Center for Space Standards and Innovation
Analytical Graphics Incorporated
Voice: 719-482-4552; E-mail: oltrogge at agi.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Fran Martínez Fadrique [mailto:fmartinez at gmv.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 8:31 AM
To: Oltrogge, Daniel <doltrogge at agi.com>; Berry, David S (3920) <david.s.berry at jpl.nasa.gov>; moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: RE: XML History Question

Hola.

Agreed that the message is vague but yet the concerns refer to the 'exclusive use of XML' and to the not acceptance by the navigation community.
We are producing not only XML and therefore we are on the safe side here.
The navigation community is certainly reluctant to the use of XML (not always; I am part of the community and I am not reluctant to use XML :-)) but there are other communities that prefer XML and that will use the ODM with this preference.

Up to here I think that I have been objective in the statements. Now some thought on the matter that not necessarily are meant to steer the way forward.
I honestly think that producing the XML version of any message is a must (as it is providing the KVN one with the rare exception of the PRM due to its complexity).
Despite of specific use cases, XML is preferred for interfaces implementation, integration and verification as there are tools that help in the testing. Those tools do not exist in text format or have to be developed adhoc for the purpose.
A consistency remark. ODM has XML versions for all exisiting messages. So have the ADM and TDM.

Required effort is another matter that of course may lead the final decision.

Best regards,
Fran

-----Original Message-----
From: MOIMS-NAV-EXEC [mailto:moims-nav-exec-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Oltrogge, Daniel
Sent: miércoles, 26 de octubre de 2016 16:04
To: Berry, David S (3920) <david.s.berry at jpl.nasa.gov>; moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: Re: [MOIMS-NAV-EXEC] XML History Question

Yes, seems open to interpretation and even mentions some drawbacks for and objections to using it.

Leaves things vague, in my mind.  And given the effort required to include XML versions, seems like we should obtain clarification first.

Thanks,

Dan

Daniel L. Oltrogge
SDC Program Manager & Senior Research Astrodynamicist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics Incorporated
Voice: 719-482-4552; E-mail: oltrogge at agi.com

-----Original Message-----
From: MOIMS-NAV-EXEC [mailto:moims-nav-exec-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of Berry, David S (3920)
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:42 PM
To: moims-nav-exec at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: [MOIMS-NAV-EXEC] FW: XML History Question

All:

This is the message I sought today regarding the use of XML in the Navigation Data Messages (specifically ODM). It may be open to interpretation...

Regards,
David

On 1/12/16, 2:57 PM, "Thomas Gannett" <tomg at aiaa.org> wrote:

    David:

    The only thing that jumps out in terms of CMC resolutions is the following:

    CMC-R-2002-10-009 The CCSDS resolves to direct Panel P1J to utilize PVL, or preferably XML, in the CCSDS 502.0-R-2 Orbit Data Messages.

    That resolution resulted from a P2 recommendation that P1J should utilize PVL or preferably XML, and ODM was the only thing P1J was working on at the time.

    At the next meeting (April 2003), by the way, the following comments from Hubertus Wanke were recorded:

    "DLR-GSOC Flight Dynamics has concerns about a recommendation of CCSDS for the exclusive use of XML within all future data interfaces. DLR doubts that such a recommendation will be accepted by the navigation community, which considers XML to be an inappropriate tool for the representation of navigation data."

    I don't know what "a recommendation of CCSDS for the exclusive use of XML within all future data interfaces" refers to. It may be something P2 was pushing for at the time.

    I have CCed Neil Dissinger, who was the CMC Rapporteur back then. He may (but probably won't) remember something.

    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Berry, David S (3920) [mailto:david.s.berry at jpl.nasa.gov]
    Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 4:57 PM
    To: CCSDS Secretariat
    Subject: History Question

    Tom:

    I'm trying to find something from CCSDS ancient history. The materials available on the CWE don't go back far enough for me to find it, so I thought maybe you'd be able to help.

    Specifically, when I became a member of the Navigation WG in December 2003, it was asserted that "the CCSDS top dogs want it [the ODM] to be based on XML, rather than plain ASCII (as it is now)". Given that I was completely new in the group, I took this at face value and didn't question it at all. At some point, I understood that the "top dogs" was the CMC. And I also started working on converting the ODM to XML.

    At the most recent meetings in Darmstadt Fall 2015, there was some discussion in the Navigation WG as to the  exact wording of the CMC resolution regarding the use of XML in CCSDS data exchange standards. I indicated that I had looked a bit in the past for the resolution (or edict or action item) from the CMC, but had not been able to find it. I took an action item to make a more concerted effort to find the edict in question.

    From the minutes of the P1J Workshop in October 2001, I found the following statement:  "At present P1J is working on Recommendations that benefit ground-to-ground exchanges between agencies.  As a result, we are requiring that our interfaces emphasize human readability with only the simplest text viewers and editors.  XML would be in conflict with that requirement, so we are not considering it at present for the Orbit Data Message Red Book." Based on this, the pronouncement/resolution from the CESG (or TSG?) was well known by that time... so it represents an upper bound on research.

    The closest thing I could find was some minutes of the TSG (CESG precursor) from May 2001 (TSG-Report0501.doc). These minutes contained an action item TSG-01-08 which stated "Discuss time and navigation formats w.r.t. language use (e.g. XML) with P1J". These same minutes reference a prior action item TSG-99-11, the content of which I cannot find (it might be the "official" edict/action item, but since it's not a CMC action item maybe not?).

    So I guess I have 2 questions, one fairly well defined and one not as well defined.

    1. Do you have access to TSG minutes from 1999 which contain the action item TSG-99-11 (and can you send them to me if you do)?

    2. Do you have access to CMC resolutions/edicts/pronouncements etc. from around the same time that might contain the direction for the panels (at least P1J) to use XML? I'm trying to find the exact wording due to a discussion with Peter Shames and Erik Barkley.

    Thanks!
    David

_______________________________________________
MOIMS-NAV-EXEC mailing list
MOIMS-NAV-EXEC at mailman.ccsds.org
https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/moims-nav-exec
_______________________________________________
MOIMS-NAV-EXEC mailing list
MOIMS-NAV-EXEC at mailman.ccsds.org
https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/moims-nav-exec

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

______________________
This message including any attachments may contain confidential information, according to our Information Security Management System,  and intended solely for a specific individual to whom they are addressed.
 Any unauthorised copy, disclosure or distribution of this message  is strictly forbidden. If you have received this transmission in error,  please notify the sender immediately and delete it.

______________________
Este mensaje, y en su caso, cualquier fichero anexo al mismo,  puede contener informacion clasificada por su emisor como confidencial  en el marco de su Sistema de Gestion de Seguridad de la Informacion siendo para uso exclusivo del destinatario, quedando prohibida su divulgacion copia o distribucion a terceros sin la autorizacion expresa del remitente. Si Vd. ha recibido este mensaje  erroneamente, se ruega lo notifique al remitente y proceda a su borrado. 
Gracias por su colaboracion.

______________________